Despite the plethora of peer-reviewed, published research supporting the efficacy of neurofeedback, as well as decades of clinical evidence, mainstream psychology has yet to officially endorse neurofeedback as an "evidence-based" treatment for any mental illness. Despite the life-changing benefits being experienced by people world-wide, mainstream psychological associations such as the Australian Psychological Society (APS) do not endorse brain-training.

In fact, there is no mention of Neurofeedback on the APS website, the predominant source for Australians seeking information regarding psychological services. Given the evidence supporting neurofeedback and other forms of neuromodulation such as tDCS, PEMF, etc., we have to ask the question: "why is this the case?"

​

Let's take a look at depression, for instance. The current "gold-standard" for the treatment of depression, as taught to psychology students in Australian universities and officially endorsed by the APS, is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Antidepressant Medication such as SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors). These are considered "Evidence-based" therapies, implying that they have been rigorously tested and proven effective. The public is led to believe that the "proper authorities" have done the research, with no agendas influencing their data and outcomes. 

​

But let us ask the question, as did psychologist Jonathan Shedler (PhD): "Where is the evidence for evidence-based therapies?" Published in Psychiatric Clinics of North America, Shedler's findings reveal that research does not in fact support assertions that manualised therapies such as CBT are scientifically proven, superior to other forms of psychotherapy, nor that they should be considered the gold standard of care. Furthermore, research on these so called "evidence-based therapies" demonstrates that they are weak treatments. They have not shown superiority to other forms of psychotherapy, few patients get well, and treatment benefits do not last. Questionable research practices create a distorted picture of the actual benefits of these therapies. 

​

​

You can access Shelder's article here:

​

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29739529

​

or here:

​

https://jonathanshedler.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Shedler-2015-Where-is-the-evidence-for-evidence-based-therapy-R.pdf 

​

And t is not just Shedler questioning the ​​efficacy and dominance of the CBT paradigm. Psychologists the world over object to having their practices restricted to a manualised approach that rarely confers much benefit to their clients. To see Sedler and other professionals deliver conference lectures on this topic, visit the YouTube channel "Challenging the Cognitive Behavioural Therapies: The Overselling of CBT's Evidence Base".

​

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_rv5vYv4HfTchv_beiqhQ

​

​

Evidence supporting the efficacy of the so called gold standard of anti-depression medication such as SSRIs has similarly been scrutinised. The findings, however, are not well-known to psychologists, psychiatrists, and especially not to patients. People are being sold pills deemed to be "safe and effective", without being made aware of the research demonstrating just the opposite.

Dr. Irving Kirsch, credentials, conducted meta-analyses on all the published research examining anti-depressants and showed that such medication is no better than placebo. Combine this with the fact that all medications have negative side-effects and typically make people who take them worse off in the long run, we are again forced to ask the question, "why is this the case?"

​

Kirsch published his findings in a book entitled, The Emperor's New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth. You can access the published research here:

​

Antidepressants and the Placebo Effect: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4172306/#c19

​

​

​

watch him talk about his findings in the following lecture:

​

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC5RZRG7-QQ

​

You 

​